Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Yep, Cassius, your quoted extract from today's RNS is BY FAR the most important thing in there. Although by no means definitive in any way, that is EXACTLY the wording that AVN has needed for weeks to put out. Now the BoD needs to deliver on its stated confidence in fund-raising... and pretty quickly. The "short term" mentioned really is very short. On that basis, I'm now expecting a fairly huge placing to be announced. Around a billion shares, I'd bet. (I actually haven't checked back to see if AVN has the requisite authority, but I'll bet they do). Separately within that RNS, declining revenue numbers show exactly how absolutely vital Hylas-4 is to the company still having a viable future. Let's all hope it's neither too little, nor too late. The above AIMO, but God knows what else they can possibly have got planned to raise required funds...

No (sadly). Very faint chance it might get acquired, if and only if it actually has any useful IP of its own.

Hearing through RNS that AVN were looking to raise somewhere between $50m and $90m via a placement would be an especially welcome piece of news. At least it'd mean that they were doing something. However, I'm not sure how pleased the ex-bondholders would be to see a further billion or more shares hit the market? That'd represent an instant and significant dilution of their 92.5% holdings... by roughly one third, I think. (I'm presuming a very optimistic placement price of 4.5p = 6.0 cents. Say AVN needs $60m to keep the maths easy... that'd be a billion new shares which I think would represent roughly a 50% increase in the total number of shares, following the 12.33 times recent increase as per the D4E swap - hence the 33% dilution figure I mention above.) However, it's late and I'm tired, so that speculative maths of mine would definitely be well worth others checking and verifying.

I'll agree with WO that H4 is supremely relevant. AVN clearly hasn't been able to secure enough revenue through its existing assets, so H4 is kind of its last hurrah. It's newer tech and eminently sensibly located in terms of footprints, so that's good, at least. And yes, H4's launch was considerably late, but the issue is, is it too late? AVN in is a bit of a nightmarish chicken and egg situation where it can't survive without substantially increased revenues (something that, as above, H4 may well help it to secure). But that nightmarish situation is widely known, so therefore potential customers may well be nervous about contractually committing to H4, due to their evaluation of operator stability... Where I disagree with WO is that I too believe that AVN, having suddenly announced a "game over" funding shortfall on Apr 9th that needs resolving by Jun 30th, very definitely needs to update the market as to its progress on sorting this out. The fact that, since announcing that bombshell, AVN has said absolutely nothing further about the matter is the single biggest concern IMV.

...a valid reason as to why the AVN board, having announced the doomsday countdown on Apr 9th by RNS, have said absolutely nothing since??? (Apart from the "don't want to think about it" possibility that they actually haven't got any resolution to their funding needs to announce, that is). SP sliding nastily south and 32 days to go... tick tock. Surely they have to say SOMETHING? And pretty damn soon?

Wow.. this thread hit the 200 post mark. Whoda thunk? Mind you, this has been ably aided and abetted by a complete misunderstanding on the part of some as to patent application process and consequent posting of repeated irrelevancies. Recent WIPO notices that have been linked to in this thread have been generated solely due to the 30 month time period from the "Original Priority Date" (24/12/2015 - as shown on various WIPO documentation relating to the CTAG still ongoing application) becoming due within the next month. Nothing more, nothing less. Separately, I note a lot of kudos and faith being placed by some directly on Mr Paul Kemp of Invicta IP Ltd, 18C Fairfield Road, Orpington, BR5 1JR. Now Mr. Kemp may be a particularly gifted Intellectual Property Lawyer, but the briefest of Google Map Street View searches on that address shows that he apparently works from an extremely modest domestic address in surburbia. Not that this necessarily means anything at all...

Rom, I doubt I could be more confused... or maybe I'm not and it's all brutally simple? The way I read the Apr 9th RNS was simply that AVN knew it had $90m of short-term liabilities already incurred that were due to be paid out during Q3 2018. I further took it that against its own projected revenues and cash position for Q3 2018, it could see that it simply didn't have the funds to cover those already incurred liabilities... hence its statement that it needed to source an extra $50m... or $90m, if that extra $40m of "infrequently occurring revenue" (whatever that refers to) didn't drop in time. IMV, one of those liabilities is deffo the final payment against H-4, which becomes payable as soon as successful in-orbit testing is completed. From memory, that's (coincidentally) $40m or thereabouts. The other $50m will, I suspect, be a combination of running costs, accrual of interest against the remaining bonds, servicing other debt, creditor invoices etc etc. So I see those two $40m amounts (one definitely due out soon and one hopefully due in soon) as completely separate things. Mind you, it's worth noting that throughout its history, AVN has danced with death on the very edge of the precipice more than once before and has always managed to pull a last-minute rabbit out of the hat. Maybe it'll manage to do so again - though that trick becomes ever increasingly harder to pull off, once it's been repeated once or twice... and this time of course we've had an "either the directors or a creditor may well put the company into liquidation" RNS, which is a new thing. All speculation - which is completely down to the ongoing bizarre radio silence from the AVN BoD. 36 days and counting...

Well on that basis Nom, you're owed an apology.from me I admitedly only sped read with growing amazement the ramptastic vomitings of a few posters, tarred them all with the same brush , copped the hump and fired both barrels. I'm very happy to be reminded that just once in a while, the word "irony" doesn't mean "a bit like iron". ATB. (Oh PS the other three I mentioned are still pondscum).

It's amazing that this stock that has as much life and potential as a long-dead duck has attracted the attentions of low-life filth. As is obvious to anyone with more braincells than fingers and toes, Toomuchshine, nomlungu and Yus777 are only here to see if they can pick the pocket of any PI mugs stupid enough to believe them - following on in the glorious tradion of MrBrown. In particular, Toomuchshine has been a member of LSE (under that ID at least) for a whole massive 6 days... Frankly, if anyone is moronic enough to fall for this utterly pathetic ramp, they probably shouldn't be allowed out in public without a carer, let alone permitted to trade shares.

Shake I thought I'd read somewhere that in-orbit testing had been completed successfully (which then triggered the final payment of some $40m becoming due by early July... which then explained at least part of AVN's sudden and short-term need for cash). Having said that, I can't for the life of me remember where I read that, nor can I find any mention of it online. So I might be entirely wrong - though the timeframe looks completely realistic, given that in-orbit testing started in the last third of April.

I am quite literally gobsmacked - as I posted before - that, following AVN's own announcement of their funding shortfall and doomsday clock, there's not been at least a holding RNS saying "Guys, we're all over this and the BoD's got every confidence that our short-term funding requirements will be fully resolved in a timely fashion". The absence of this being said makes me think that it's not being allowed to be said... because it's not true. I'm guessing from recent SP trends that I'm not alone in those thoughts? Either way, I guess this will all become clear pretty soon.. 37 days and counting. AIMO.

...and as ever, Dougal, the sincerest best of luck to you. If this does eventually come right and well-mannered unswerving commitment counts for anything, nobody will be more deserving than you.

Always worth considering how we actually allegedly "know" things... what was the source of that "knowledge"? Has that source proven to be reliable or not in other "knowledge" it has imparted? Just saying...

MTB absolutely right... I clearly need to re-read my secret membership book.

Heh... you can always recognise an EGSC member anyway, if you know what to look for. Watch out for the coyly raised index finger touching the corner of the mouth. They can't help it...

Romaron, in general, you're right. The value of any given spectrum is in large part down to the number of recipients (or customers if you like) that can be served by it. Therefore the 5G spectrum in New York City is going to be worth one whole lot more than the same 5G spectrum band covering the Sahara. I'm on record as saying that, apart from specific vertical applications, satellite-delivered broadband has a rapidly declining role in high population density developed geographies (Western Europe being a classic example). There are far more efficient, much more readily deployable and commercially worthwhile transmission technologies to cover needs there. There's a host of fast-growing evidence to support my opinion (but nevertheless, that's all it is... just my opinion). However, take a nascent market like Africa, or the Middle East - or even an existing one like the Mid-Western USA. Sheer economics vs population density completely reverses the above paradigm and - for all its limitations - satellite becomes quite literally the only cost-effective delivery mechanism for broadband. It very definitely has its place and role to play, if intelligently and appropriately targeted. And that's even without looking at particular and potentially both large and lucrative vertical markets like in-flight connectivity, which is effectively another "satellite or nothing" opportunity. AVN needs to ensure that it's chasing the right rabbits - as I'm sure it must know. The question remains... can it evolve its business model in terms of targeting and deliver appropriate contracts of sufficient value in time to address its cash needs?.

GCCRa, I understand that it's important to the myth you're so desperate to create for you to try to convince everyone that AVN is such a fabulous stock that there can only possibly be one sole person with any negative opinion. That one person according to you holds multiple IDs and is (of course) a member of the legendary Evil Global Shorting Conspiracy (tm)... To which I'd reply that the only questions begged by your assertions are:- Are you a fanatical zealot so blinded both by misplaced faith and a series of bad decisions on this stock that you'll spout whatever nonsense you can in an effort to shore up your rapidly crumbling confirmation bias? Or are you just yet another AIM pump n dumper? I note that you have STILL avoided the other question you've been asked now several times - which is based solely on the information issued out by the company itself. Let's try again... What's your opinion on what AVN is doing - or has done - to address its self-announced funding shortfall of $50m (or possibly $90m) that it has categorically stated that it needs to resolve within the next 38 days? I admit, that's a big boy's question... so maybe you're better off continuing to pretend the issue doesn't exist and carrying on living in Care Bear World, where everything's pink, fluffy and full of rainbows, where nothing troublesome ever even needs considering.

This thread is now effectively unreadable due to a) the esoteric and argumentative nature of the content and b) the fact that I've lost the will to live to scroll it all the way down. However, it'll be vaguely amusing to see if it hits the 200 post mark. Anyone got the Record Breakers number?

William, I'm not sure how real and concrete that 140p offer actually was. It certainly got taken off the table pretty damn quickly. Plus today, there are now 12.333 x more shares than there used to be (courtesy of the D4E swap), so that 140p offer today would only be 11.35p to amount to the same overall value (although now there's obviously less debt too) . However IMV estimating 50p today (9 x current SP) is still a bit of a reach, to say the least. Can I also suggest you use the "Reply" link when replying to a post in a thread? It saves all your replies becoming separate topics. Thanks.

Depends on what value might be ascribed to the business as a viable going concern (revenue vs cost and debt), because acquiring it lock stock and barrel means assuming the liabilities as well. I'm sure that other operators are weighing (or almost certainly have already weighed) all that up and are comparing such an approach to merely trying to cherry pick the assets they may see a value in from a carcass. That's absolutely not to say AVN is inevitably doomed... it's just what competitors in any industry will always evaluate, whenever a rival looks a tad sickly, just in case said sickness proves fatal.